D_09 Allyship: Solidary Engagement, Identity, and Social Cohesion

Sections:: Jena
Disciplines:: Psychology , Sociology , Social/Cultural Anthropology
Belongs to:: Dynamics of hegemony (D: Cultural Dynamics of Cohesion)

Abstract

We live in a society in which not everyone has the same opportunities. Characteristics such as origin, gender, education, sexual orientation, age, or language shape individuals’ social positions and the privileges associated with them. This work package examines how people, acting as “allies,” can use their privileges to promote a more just and open society and thereby strengthen democratic social cohesion.

In recent years, the concept of allyship has also gained prominence in German-speaking contexts. Allyship refers to the use—or deliberate relinquishment—of resources and power in support of disadvantaged groups. What is distinctive about allyship is that the life trajectories and social positions of marginalized individuals and their allies may differ substantially, yet they form alliances to counteract discrimination. Despite its popularity, the concept of allyship is used and understood in diverse ways.

The work package seeks to clarify what constitutes allyship and what conditions are required for it to be effective. To this end, we analyze existing literature as well as interviews and survey data. A central concern is to include the perspectives of people with experiences of discrimination. What forms of support from allies exist? What does allyship require in order to be genuinely helpful? And when is support well-intentioned but ineffective—or even reinforcing existing inequalities? In close collaboration with civil society actors, the project aims to develop concrete recommendations for action.

In times of increasing polarization, when points of contact with social groups beyond one’s own social and ideological “bubble” are becoming rarer, allyship plays a particularly important role. It enables insights into other life worlds and can help bridge social divides. Ideally, allyship contributes to dismantling structures of inequality and prejudice.

Democratic societies are characterized by ongoing processes of negotiation over interpretive authority, normative frameworks, identities, and participation, which require continual reconfigurations of collective action. As a specific practice of such action, this work package (WP) offers a differentiated examination of the concept of “allyship,” understood as forms of alliance-building between social subgroups. In addition to clarifying how allyship relates to associated concepts—such as “accompliceship,” “coalition,” or “solidarity”—both in terms of historical reception and practical effects, the WP focuses in particular on the contemporary sociopolitical relevance of allyship within civic engagement. How does allyship function as a form of community-building across categorical divides, enabling shared frames of understanding and new possibilities for identification? What potential does allyship hold as a countermodel to media-driven narratives of social fragmentation—namely, as a contribution to democratic and inclusive social cohesion?

Closely linked to the concerns of the LGBTIQ and Black Lives Matter movements in the United States, the concept of allyship has gained increasing prominence in German-speaking societies in recent years. At the same time, its concrete requirements and defining characteristics often remain vague. In the relevant literature, interpretations differ substantially, for example with regard to whether allyship is conceived as an act or an identity, as a self-designation or an attribution by others, how privileges are addressed, and which levels of impact are emphasized. It is precisely this diversity—or potential arbitrariness—of a generally positively connoted concept that reveals its weaknesses and internal contradictions. Recent scholarship has critically discussed these issues under terms such as the ally paradox or performative allyship, pointing to empty gestures and symbolic declarations that lack substantive impact.

In line with the thematic focus of the research area, this WP primarily investigates negotiation processes, group dynamics, and practices of allyship aimed at disrupting hegemonic patterns of thought and opening up spaces for action within seemingly entrenched identity conflicts. If allyship is understood as a form of participation that seeks to meet the normative demands of accepting social diversity within anti-discrimination efforts, a critical examination of its barriers, challenges, and risks is indispensable. This requires an intersectional understanding of ideologies of inequality and their hegemonic effects in order to analyze processes of identity formation as well as symbolic conflicts over status, recognition, and participation.

The WP is structured into two modules.

Module 1

Module 1 focuses on the perspectives of marginalized subgroups on “allies” within the dominant society. It comprises a theoretical and empirical examination of the concept of allyship in the context of LGBTIQ communities. From the vantage point of marginalized groups, the module identifies characteristic and distinguishing features of allyship, as well as its contradictions. What conditions do marginalized communities place on allies from dominant social positions? Which forms of allyship are effective in strengthening marginalized communities? Allyship is analyzed in its function as a source of acceptance for marginalized perspectives. At the same time, the identities and ascriptions (re)constructed through allyship are examined with regard to their potential reproduction of hegemonic structures and social inequalities, thereby also addressing forms of allyship that may be detrimental to social cohesion.

Module 2

Module 2 examines the conditions of allyship between marginalized groups themselves. Drawing on research on intersectionality, it asks about potential alliances in the sense of a “rebellious universalism.” How do emancipatory movements relate to one another? To what extent do they create space for diverse perspectives and address intersectional experiences of discrimination? Practices of allyship as they occur in lived engagement contexts are contrasted with the success factors and challenges identified in Module 1. Particular attention is paid to the internal heterogeneity of collective meaning structures, which continually produce inclusions and exclusions even within marginalized groups. These dynamics are analyzed in relation to concrete contexts of collective action. In cooperation with practice partners, the WP derives recommendations for action, among others for civil society organizations and policymakers.